Musky

1…89111314…59

Comments

  • JimD666
    JimD666 Posts: 2,293
    edited November 2022
    From the wiki

    "Tesla was incorporated in July 2003 by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning as Tesla Motors. The company's name is a tribute to inventor and electrical engineer Nikola Tesla. In February 2004, via a $6.5 million investment, Elon Musk became the largest shareholder of the company. He has served as CEO since 2008"

    In short Musk didn't found the company. He was taken to court for claiming he was a founder. Court case was settled. My personal reading of that was he paid off the founder who did sue. YMMV 🤷‍♂️
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,094
    edited November 2022
    JimD666 said:

    From the wiki

    "Tesla was incorporated in July 2003 by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning as Tesla Motors. The company's name is a tribute to inventor and electrical engineer Nikola Tesla. In February 2004, via a $6.5 million investment, Elon Musk became the largest shareholder of the company. He has served as CEO since 2008"

    In short Musk didn't found the company. He was taken to court for claiming he was a founder. Court case was settled. My personal reading of that was he paid off the founder who did sue. YMMV 🤷‍♂️

    Sure, but what had they achieved, had in production at that point?

    Tesla was founded in July 2003, and until 2004, Eberhard and Tarpenning funded the company themselves. Eberhard served as the CEO with Tarpenning the CFO. However, after less than a year things changed.

    In January 2004, Eberhard, Tarpenning and the third member of their team, Ian Wright, went looking for venture capital funding, it was at this point that they connected with Elon Musk, founder of PayPal. In February 2004, Musk contributed $6.5 million to Tesla’s Series A round of investment (which totalled $7.5 million) and was made chairman of the board of directors.

    Musk took an active role in the company, overseeing the design of the roadster to the smallest detail, however, he wasn’t involved in the day-to-day functions of the business itself.
    https://www.osv.ltd.uk/tesla-history/

    Right, you'll have to play without me.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    Hey 'zing, I've got this NFT of the Muskrat. How much you willing to offer me?
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,094
    orraloon said:

    Hey 'zing, I've got this NFT of the Muskrat. How much you willing to offer me?

    Wow, cool, a million Marsaquid?
  • Munsford0
    Munsford0 Posts: 678
    @ Salty:

    "Again, I've said all this before.

    As a Country we need Musk's."

    I think we can agree on that. One of only two producers of splendid Newmarket sausages.*

    https://www.musks.com

    Or have I been misled by your random apostrophe?

    * and before you start, no there's no horse meat in them...
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,094
    Fookin pothead horse eate...Oh.

    Laters.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,851
    kingstongraham said:

    TheBigBean said:

    kingstongraham said:

    pblakeney said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rick_chasey said:



    He’s really going to have it make a lot more money than it is

    For those of us who don’t do Twitter could you confirm whether that means Twitter borrowed lots of money to pay Elon the money that he borrowed to buy Twitter?
    Sounds like he is doing a Glazer style buyout if so.
    I don't understand how this works at all. He bought the company using $13bn that the company that he's bought now owes to banks.
    Which bit is confusing?

    Some of the $13m is secured against other stuff.



    Who borrowed the money?
    Bit of a boring answer, but I would presume either a holding co (1 below) or the entity itself (2 below).

    1. Stick equity plus debt into a holding company and use proceeds to buy the shares of Twitter

    2. Buy shares notionally with equity whilst simultaneously arranging debt for Twitter. The money then needs a way to go from Twitter to Musk (distribution, equity redemption etc.) The loan is netted off against the equity, so the cash movement is lower. It all happens simultaneously.

    Probably other options too
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    I must be dense, I still don't understand.

    I understand how 1) could work and the holding company then owns twitter and also owes a shitload of money. Is that just treated as effectively the same as twitter owing the money?
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    2) is just a load of letters to me, sorry
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,851
    kingstongraham said:

    I must be dense, I still don't understand.

    I understand how 1) could work and the holding company then owns twitter and also owes a shitload of money. Is that just treated as effectively the same as twitter owing the money?

    Pretty much.
  • shirley_basso
    shirley_basso Posts: 6,195
    Look at it this way (a vast oversimplification)

    The company borrows the money in order to buy the shares back from some of the outgoing shareholders which are then cancelled.

    PLUS

    Musk invests money to buy shares from remaining outgoing shareholders.

    EQUALS

    All shares in circulation are now owned by Musk.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,851
    kingstongraham said:

    2) is just a load of letters to me, sorry

    Musk -> Shareholders $45bn
    Banks -> Twitter $13bn
    Twitter -> Musk $13bn

    All netted off by a bank, so actual cash is Musk -> Shareholder $32bn Bank->Shareholders $13bn.

    Any better?
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    kingstongraham said:

    I must be dense, I still don't understand.

    I understand how 1) could work and the holding company then owns twitter and also owes a shitload of money. Is that just treated as effectively the same as twitter owing the money?

    Musk buys Twitter.
    Twitter borrows $13bn
    Twitter gives $13bn to Musk

    It is what the Glazers did when they bought Man Utd
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    surrey_commuter said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I must be dense, I still don't understand.

    I understand how 1) could work and the holding company then owns twitter and also owes a shitload of money. Is that just treated as effectively the same as twitter owing the money?

    Musk buys Twitter.
    Twitter borrows $13bn
    Twitter gives $13bn to Musk

    It is what the Glazers did when they bought Man Utd
    That explanation is mental.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    shirley_basso said:

    Look at it this way (a vast oversimplification)

    The company borrows the money in order to buy the shares back from some of the outgoing shareholders which are then cancelled.

    PLUS

    Musk invests money to buy shares from remaining outgoing shareholders.

    EQUALS

    All shares in circulation are now owned by Musk.

    Thank you. That makes sense.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    edited November 2022
    Does that mean $13bn is the limit that those providing financing were willing to have tied up in the company rather than owed by Musk personally?
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    I bet the Saudis wish they'd just sold up.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,851
    edited November 2022
    kingstongraham said:

    Does that mean $13bn is the limit that those providing financing were willing to have tied up in the company rather than owed by Musk personally?

    I did a quick google and half is secured against Twitter. A quarter is a bridging loan with other security (presumably shares in Tesla). The other quarter is unsecured - presumably in Twitter.

    No idea whether it is the maximum, but presumably it is what Musk needed.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    edited November 2022
    TheBigBean said:

    kingstongraham said:

    Does that mean $13bn is the limit that those providing financing were willing to have tied up in the company rather than owed by Musk personally?

    I did a quick google and half is secured against Twitter. A quarter is a bridging loan with other security (presumably shares in Tesla). The other quarter is unsecured - presumably in Twitter.

    No idea whether it is the maximum, but presumably it is what Musk needed.
    But that $13bn debt is added to twitter's balance sheet.

    If he could have done it without also selling $27bn with of Tesla shares, he probably would have.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/elon-musks-twitter-deal-is-different-than-most-lbos-heres-how/2022/11/12/7c671b64-62b9-11ed-a131-e900e4a6336b_story.html
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    Given the Space Karen is a proper LOMBARD, what could possibly go wrong?

    (LBOs... shake head emoji)
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,851
    kingstongraham said:

    TheBigBean said:

    kingstongraham said:

    Does that mean $13bn is the limit that those providing financing were willing to have tied up in the company rather than owed by Musk personally?

    I did a quick google and half is secured against Twitter. A quarter is a bridging loan with other security (presumably shares in Tesla). The other quarter is unsecured - presumably in Twitter.

    No idea whether it is the maximum, but presumably it is what Musk needed.
    But that $13bn debt is added to twitter's balance sheet.

    If he could have done it without also selling $27bn with of Tesla shares, he probably would have.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/elon-musks-twitter-deal-is-different-than-most-lbos-heres-how/2022/11/12/7c671b64-62b9-11ed-a131-e900e4a6336b_story.html
    I'm not sure what your specific interest is, but the location of the debt isn't that relevant. If the lenders enforce their security they can move it and sell off twitter easily enough. Also if the bridging loan is secured against something else then they can sell the something else.

    The only real consideration in whether to put it in a hold co or the asset is the tax consequences.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,467
    I quite like the term Space Karen.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,467
    Seems the chances of a new platform taking over from Twitter are steadily increasing, what with the genius sacking everyone who points out that he doesn't understand the thing he bought,or it seems disagrees with him in any way. At this rate there will very quickly be not even a skeleton staff.

    Totally into free speech, though.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    rjsterry said:

    I quite like the term Space Karen.

    I didn't invent it, read it elsewhere, liked it and re-used. Good innit. 😊
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 20,210
    orraloon said:

    rjsterry said:

    I quite like the term Space Karen.

    I didn't invent it, read it elsewhere, liked it and re-used. Good innit. 😊

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-elon-musk-is-being-called-space-karen-on-twitter-2020-11-16
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,094
    edited November 2022
    Time magazine named Tesla CEO and SpaceX founder Elon Musk as its 2021 Person of the Year on Monday. Time's editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal explained the decision to pick the richest man on Earth, saying he was emblematic of 2021 and the year's most influential person.

    "Person of the Year is a marker of influence, and few individuals have had more influence than Musk on life on Earth, and potentially life off Earth too," Felsenthal wrote.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-time-person-year-2021/#:~:text=Time magazine named Tesla CEO,the year's most influential person.

    I would just like to take this opportunity to add to this wonderful thread and say, not just Earth but the Universe too, with his drive towards re-usable rockets making Space travel much cheaper, what a guy.

    I thank you all in advance for the twenty likes.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,280
    TheBigBean said:

    kingstongraham said:

    TheBigBean said:

    kingstongraham said:

    Does that mean $13bn is the limit that those providing financing were willing to have tied up in the company rather than owed by Musk personally?

    I did a quick google and half is secured against Twitter. A quarter is a bridging loan with other security (presumably shares in Tesla). The other quarter is unsecured - presumably in Twitter.

    No idea whether it is the maximum, but presumably it is what Musk needed.
    But that $13bn debt is added to twitter's balance sheet.

    If he could have done it without also selling $27bn with of Tesla shares, he probably would have.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/elon-musks-twitter-deal-is-different-than-most-lbos-heres-how/2022/11/12/7c671b64-62b9-11ed-a131-e900e4a6336b_story.html
    I'm not sure what your specific interest is, but the location of the debt isn't that relevant. If the lenders enforce their security they can move it and sell off twitter easily enough. Also if the bridging loan is secured against something else then they can sell the something else.

    The only real consideration in whether to put it in a hold co or the asset is the tax consequences.
    It's pretty standard M&A stuff.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,599
    focuszing723 said:

    Time magazine named Tesla CEO and SpaceX founder Elon Musk as its 2021 Person of the Year on Monday. Time's editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal explained the decision to pick the richest man on Earth, saying he was emblematic of 2021 and the year's most influential person.

    "Person of the Year is a marker of influence, and few individuals have had more influence than Musk on life on Earth, and potentially life off Earth too," Felsenthal wrote.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-time-person-year-2021/#:~:text=Time magazine named Tesla CEO,the year's most influential person.

    I would just like to take this opportunity to add to this wonderful thread and say, not just Earth but the Universe too, with his drive towards re-usable rockets making Space travel much cheaper, what a guy.

    I thank you all in advance for the twenty likes.
    They give person of the year to any old Bozo
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,851
    Stevo_666 said:

    TheBigBean said:

    kingstongraham said:

    TheBigBean said:

    kingstongraham said:

    Does that mean $13bn is the limit that those providing financing were willing to have tied up in the company rather than owed by Musk personally?

    I did a quick google and half is secured against Twitter. A quarter is a bridging loan with other security (presumably shares in Tesla). The other quarter is unsecured - presumably in Twitter.

    No idea whether it is the maximum, but presumably it is what Musk needed.
    But that $13bn debt is added to twitter's balance sheet.

    If he could have done it without also selling $27bn with of Tesla shares, he probably would have.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/elon-musks-twitter-deal-is-different-than-most-lbos-heres-how/2022/11/12/7c671b64-62b9-11ed-a131-e900e4a6336b_story.html
    I'm not sure what your specific interest is, but the location of the debt isn't that relevant. If the lenders enforce their security they can move it and sell off twitter easily enough. Also if the bridging loan is secured against something else then they can sell the something else.

    The only real consideration in whether to put it in a hold co or the asset is the tax consequences.
    It's pretty standard M&A stuff.
    No one is an expert in all subjects. It's why I needed a plumbing thread. A bike forum is apparently a useful place to share knowledge though. Sadly, I'm not sure my knowledge is that useful to anyone.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,058
    focuszing723 said:

    Time magazine named Tesla CEO and SpaceX founder Elon Musk as its 2021 Person of the Year on Monday. Time's editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal explained the decision to pick the richest man on Earth, saying he was emblematic of 2021 and the year's most influential person.

    "Person of the Year is a marker of influence, and few individuals have had more influence than Musk on life on Earth, and potentially life off Earth too," Felsenthal wrote.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-time-person-year-2021/#:~:text=Time magazine named Tesla CEO,the year's most influential person.

    I would just like to take this opportunity to add to this wonderful thread and say, not just Earth but the Universe too, with his drive towards re-usable rockets making Space travel much cheaper, what a guy.

    I thank you all in advance for the twenty likes.
    Would you really want him as your emperor when you settle on Mars?

Categories